Explaining the Equality Act

 https://www.heritage.org/gender/heritage-explains/the-equality-act

It is a good fairly short description of what will likely become law if Democrats get full control of  Congress and the Presidency in 2025 (which, I sadly expect given the insecurity of our "elections"). 

If you read this blog or keep in touch with some media that has conservative reality based reporting base, you already know what happens when we have a new "protected class". 

Anyone can identify as whatever "gender" they want, however, they stay the same sex unless we change some laws. 

Were I to propose a law on this subject, (which I don't think should have standing under the law at all) I would propose: 

• Any "gender" selection "treatment" be strictly prohibited until the victim of ths mental illness reaches 21. 
  
  
• If  a male decides to identify as female, he would be required to have all genitalia surgically removed, including the prostate, and the most effective means to purge testosterone from the body be initiated. In this manner, if he chooses to use women's restrooms and locker rooms he would not be capable of rape. Likewise, if the testosterone can be removed. his advantage in women's sports will be curtailed. 
  
  
• Females would receive a hysterectomy, and a radical mastectomy of their breasts if they desire to identify as males. Issues such as construction of a penis or giving testosterone are more problematic. Since creation is best left to God, destruction and mutilation are (as would be required with males) are more predictable. The man made "woman" is a mentally damaged and unpredictably likely a danger to others. 

The main point of this post is awareness. The population needs to be aware of what a vote for Democrats is likely to mean ... their law will look nothing like my proposal, and your children and grandchildren can be forcibly removed from their parents under their laws and the biological men will remain able to molest women and children, the true goal of their "transition". 

A Democrats View of Republican Fascism

 A post appeared on Facebook that was so crazy, I decided to rebut the insanity. 

In case you are ever faced with the strange idea that conservatives / Republicans are somehow leading us toward Fascism. Here is a fairly concise debunking.

Nepotism  – Hunter, James Biden, Hallie Biden 

Cronyism - Rob Walker, James Gilliar

Widespread Corruption – Ukrainian,  Chinese payoffs. https://nypost.com/2023/05/10/how-the-biden-corruption-empire-ran-under-the-radar-for-so-long/ 

Identifying “enemies” as a unifying cause - “right wing extremists are the greatest threat to our country”  Everyone needs to see and hear Biden’s black and red speech https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/joe-bidens-this-is-not-normal-speech

Nationalism, Simple Slogans - “Build Back Better” https://www.leftvoice.org/capitalism-nationalism-and-copaganda-bidens-first-state-of-the-union/  Of course, all politicians do this. "Make America Great Again", or Bill Clinton "Putting People First" 

Disdain for Human Rights – Killing infants in the womb, lockdowns, suppressing free speech, opposing the right to bear arms (self defense) 

Identifying some humans as lower status - “White Privilege”, MAGA Republicans, gun owners, deplorables, bitter clingers … 

Religion and Government intertwined – Wokeism is the Democrat  national religion, and if you are “out there” as a Christian, you are a “heretic”. Democrats believe “Government is great, government is good, we thank it for our daily bread”/ 

Corporate Power Protected - Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter (until Elon), Soros Fund, Bloomberg, Oracle

Labor Power Suppressed – The “Rust Belt” supported Trump. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/22/donald-trump-union-support-snub-joe-biden-418329

Disdain for Intellectualism and the arts – “The Closing Of The American Mind” is an excellent book lamenting how our universities left the Great Books, and understanding the great history of Western (largely Christian) Art . There are many conservative intellectuals, they are just largely suppressed. Postmodernism, a Democrat staple, invalidates intellectualism and the arts (as well as history). 

Increasing Police and Military Power - Our military is in shambles and our police are under attack. Law and order are certainly not a Democrat value. What Democrats/Fascists desire is a strong POLITICAL police state. Put your political enemies in prison, and defund local police to make the citizenry vulnerable and afraid. Fascists disarm their citizens. Right now, Democrats seem to believe that increasing proxy military power serves their interests.

Punishing Personal Enemies – The two tier “justice” system is so obvious at this point that it needs no explanation. Since Biden IS “the state” at this point, politics are personal.

Squelching Opposing Viewpoints - Attempted humor? Canceling, deplatforming, labeling anything outside your narrative “disinformation” and suppressing it? Democrat staples. 

Opposing Freedom Of the Press – “The Press” is essentially the Internet today. See previous. The NY Post had the full story on Hunter’s laptop before the election. That information was suppressed. Our press is essentially the Democrat press. 

Controlling the Media Through Media Ties – Hello? The media has been a Democrat lapdog for a long time, moreso today. “National Public Radio” is really “Democrat Propaganda Radio”. They don’t just control it, they make their opposition help pay for it! 

Isolating Followers From Outside Information - Another Democrat staple. They control education, universities, 90% of media, and all most Americans see is the Democrat narrative. 

Sexism - Gender roles are more rigid – “Gender” is a social construct invented in the ‘50s by a guy named John Money, Sex is about men and women. Sex is very rigid, and only women can have babies, thus maintaining the population. Throw away sex, your movement lasts one generation. Fascists like a lot of kids (future soldiers). They also like as many women as they can get into the munitions plants. Eugenics is also a Democrat staple … Planned Parenthood was founded to “purify the race”. A lot of Democrat/Fascist policies don’t make sense. When ideology is your religion, that tends to happen. 

Obsession with national “security” – Since 9/11, both parties have increased surveillance of citizens. Since Democrats control the Administrative State, that works out largely to their benefit. They use organizations like the FBI, NSA and CIA for political purposes. What they are increasingly obtaining is the “security” of single party rule. Single party rule is a cornerstone of Fascism. 

Fraudulent Elections – Another attempt at humor? Mail in “voting” is internationally laughable. Mexico, Canada, and every European country have election integrity. Democrats oppose even the most basic element of trusting an election, voter ID. There is only one reason to oppose that, you know that you have to cheat to win.  

If you read through my rebuttal, hopefully you saw things where your brain said "Republicans/conservatives do that too". Indeed. Both parties involve humans, and so there will be similarities.

I like to boil it down to "Control vs Chaos", or as I often say "One ditch or the other" (and humans are notorious ditch drivers).

https://bilber99.blogspot.com/2016/01/left-and-right-explained.html

Victor Davis Hanson, Ukraine, Hillary, Obama, etc

https://victorhanson.com/the-ukraine-american-gordian-knot/

Victor Davis Hanson is a truth treasure in a time of global perfidy. The whole linked is well worth the time. Our sense of "history" doesn't go back much beyond a week or two, unless it is attacking Trump, or tearing down some statues so that we are a people with no history.

At one point the war in Ukraine was to defend against Russian aggression ...

 

But apparently, the war’s aims have now shifted to reestablishing the 2013 Ukrainian-Russian border. That is an ambitious agenda and, in the past, neither President Barack Obama nor Donald Trump nor Joe Biden had ever signed on to it. Oddly, those on the Left calling for the utter defeat and humiliation of the Putin regime and the retaking of Crimea (and who also gave us 2009 Russian “reset”) had rarely voiced such agendas after the 2014 aggression during the Obama Administration. (And remember that was not Putin’s first rodeo; he had invaded Georgia and absorbed South Ossetia in 2008).

Yes, the haughty "Russian Reset" ... Obama and Hillary crowing about how we were now allies with Russia!

They did indeed do some sort of "reset".

 

From 2013 onward, Ukrainian opponents of the then-Kyiv government sought out officials high up in the Obama Administration to aid in their efforts to remove the elected, albeit pro-Russian, president and then to help fast track the proper successor government.

In 2015-2016, on the assumption that Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in for the presidency, a Ukrainian-American consultant was hired by the Democratic National Committee. More specifically, she colluded with the hierarchy of the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, D.C., to derail Trump’s then-campaign manager Paul Manafort on grounds he was too friendly with the Russians.

Remember the hero of the left and media Alex Vindman, who illegally (treasonously) leaked a confidential phone call between Trump and Zelensky?

Since his retirement from the military, Vindman has been a vocal proponent on cable news of the need to step up existing massive U.S. arms shipments to his native Ukraine, and belittles most who express worries about the commensurate depletion in American strategic arms stocks.

He did his reputation on the Left no favors when he founded his own military contracting company, Trident Support, in which he seeks to be paid millions by the Ukrainian government to service and repair imported arms inside Ukraine.

In other words, Vindman, who was the catalyst for the impeachment of a president over the question of arms shipments to Ukraine, is now a wannabe profiteering middleman military contractor facilitating arms transfers from NATO countries to Ukraine.

While the Biden administration and NATO sabre rattle us toward nuclear war, at least traitors like Vindeman are able to get some big bucks. It would be tragic if ALL the graft went to the crime families of the Bidens and the Clintons.  

 

Europe Is Great! (When it agrees with the left)

 https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/06/question-for-the-identitarians.php

'The American left likes to selectively applaud especially Scandinavian Europe when it at least thinks it agrees with them. Turns out that socialist "paradises" like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, etc are less socialist than that US. Mythology is much more important to Democrats than reality, since reality is generally hostile to their mythology. 

Scandinavian countries have stricter abortion laws than the US. 

They also believe the science rather than the narrative on transgender. 

The European medical community, by contrast, is expressing doubts about that approach. Having allowed these treatments for years, five countries—the U.K., Sweden, Finland, Norway and France—now urge caution in their use for minors, stressing a lack of evidence that the benefits outweigh the risks. This month, the U.K.’s publicly funded National Health Service limited the use of puberty blockers to clinical trials, putting the drugs beyond the reach of most children.

I see a few reasons for this: 

• European media and science are still more diverse than the US. The EU has not been weaponized to the degree that the Administrative State has in the US.
• The Democrat Administrative State in the US uses the NIH, CDC, etc in concert with Big Pharma to boost profits, that are then rolled back into the Democrat political machine. 
• Europe is not yet as hostile to religion and families as the US elites are. The countries retain their state religions, and realize that religion is a unifying force. The US is hard at work to establish "Wokeism" as the state religion ... with little thought as to what effect that will have. 

Why Humans Need Hell

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/06/case-closed-it-was-a-lab-leak.php

Progressivism, Democrats, the Administrative State, Intellectuals, etc bristle at the idea of "God", even more so at the idea that there is such a thing as sort of "defined transcendent morality" beyond "I get to define MY truth".  Especially a morality with judgement and eternal damnation. 

They get completely outraged by the idea that God would punish the evil that he has decreed to be evil eternally. It might give some people some second thoughts about some of the actions they want to take in this life. "Progress" denies human responsibility ... the fault is always elsewhere. History, white privilege, Christians, mental health, not enough funding for unionized schools, "hate speech", guns, ... being on the left means never being responsible for anything other than the best outcomes. 

One needs to be a very very dedicated "Wuhan Denier" to not realize that the Covid virus came from the Wuhan lab, and it was created explicitly to be very transmissible, and likely to kill primarily old people. If there is no real morality, and you are a a utilitarian, you seek "the good" for the greatest number. The following definition is from Google's AI, so if robots outnumber humans and humans are a threat to them, AI will seem pretty clear on "the right thing to do",

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that states that the consequences of an action are the only standard of right and wrong. It is a form of consequentialism, which states that the most ethical choice is the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number. Utilitarianism is one of the best known and most influential moral theories.

Pilate asked, "what is truth"?, many philosophers. have asked "what is good?"

Nietzsche and most atheists boil "the good" down to "whatever power says it is".

As the research at the Wuhan lab became increasingly "successful" (meaning that they had a virus that was very transmissible and would kill a lot of people). the research went increasingly dark. Following the link at the top gives more detail. 

The results of Baric’s experiment with the genetic sequence given to him by Shi were published in co-authored research in November 2015. The combined Sars copy and SHC014 virus was a potential mass killer. It caused severe lung damage in humanized mice and was resistant to vaccines developed for Sars. The paper acknowledged this might have been an experiment that was too dangerous.

It caused a big stir. “If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” warned Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris. 

Both the Chinese and the US were funding this research. They made up excuses that were essentially "First you have to CREATE Godzilla, then you can figure out how to defend against him". What could go wrong?

The mice were monitored in their cages over two weeks. The results were shocking. The mutant virus that fused WIV1 with SHC014 killed 75 percent of the rodents and was three times as lethal as the original WIV1. In the early days of the infection, the mice’s human-like lungs were found to contain a viral load up to 10,000 times greater than the original WIV1 virus.

The scientists had created a highly infectious super-coronavirus with a terrifying kill-rate that in all probability would never have emerged in nature. The new genetically modified virus was not Covid-19 but it might have been even more deadly if it had leaked.

So governments worked together to create hyper lethal viruses that would not occur in nature, would be impossible to control, very transmissible, and have various levels of lethality, and they "leaked" ... or were released. "At this point what does it matter" (a good Hillary quote on her Benghazi disaster).  As Stalin said, "Death solves all problems, no man, no problem". 

In a utilitarian world where there are too many elderly, and the general population is still not willing to accept euthanasia, would not killing elderly be a utilitarian "moral imperative"? How many times do we need to hear "Climate Change is and existential issue" before some "courageous/moral" utilitarian government or person releases an engineered virus that kills 80% or more of the world population?

It seems likely that survivors might canonize the viral "savior of the planet" as a "second Noah". 

As people have abandoned the idea of an afterlife and final judgement, the concepts of sin, morality, good, evil, etc. are completely mutable. No need to worry about punishment ... in this world if you are well connected with those who control the global narrative, and, since there is no "next", why worry? Eat. drink, indulge whatever sexual or other pleasures you desire. Life is short, and then "poof". "Poof" is your hope. 

Therefore, who is to judge those with the power and the means to do things that people that retain that old sense of morality find unthinkable? The Holocaust happened; Hitler at least wagered that Hell was imaginary. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and whoever directed the creation of Covid obviously had other concerns than Hell. 

Even when culture retained the idea of eternal punishment, severely evil things were still done. Today, without the belief in ultimate justice being assured by Romans 12:19 "Vengeance is mine, I shall repay, says the Lord", humans feel they MUST mete out "justice", and murder, suicide, hatred, division, broken families, countries, communities, and lives abound. 

Russia has said multiple times that they WILL use nuclear weapons if they are pushed too far. Meanwhile the West provokes, them with sanctions that cripple their economies, declare their leader a "war criminal", arms their enemies, and makes their opponent a star. Nobody seems to believe what they say. If Putin is really ailing, and believes this is all there is, starting WWIII would certainly ensure his place in history, and it is doubtful he would be seen as more evil than Hitler ... or possibly not even Trump, according to the left. 

The anesthetized Western masses increasingly believe that only those that still claim divine morality are a danger. 

Without God, the people perish. By their own hand, or by the hand of power without eternal moral sanction. 

Prosecution Vs Persecution

 https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/supreme-court-overturns-bob-mcdonnells-corruption-convictions-224833

The SCOTUS actually overturned the conviction of a Republican for acting like a typical politician. Amazing! Could this be the start of some semblance of equal treatment under the law? 

We all know that the typical politician in the US starts from fairly modest means, moving up the ranks to once reaching the House or the Senate, being in the "top 1%" or higher. Even self proclaimed Socialist Bernie Sanders has managed to amass a $5 million net worth.

Some of the key reasons for this are: 

• Book deals
• Being able to keep significant amount of campaign contributions 
• A very cushy retirement plan.
• Generous expense accounts.
• A housing allowance that covers the cost of their living in DC

All of those are generally legal. The book deals are often questionable, and companies or individuals seeking favor may buy a lot of books, often through "straw purchasers". 

Covering "the costs" of speaking fees are often quite generous. 

If you are a "friend" of a government official and take them with you on an expensive trip, let them use your vacation home, pick them up with your private jet, etc, these are nice benefits. It doesn't directly increase your wealth, but you don't have to spend your cash for vacations that the rest of us save up for. 

Then there are the "foundations". The Clinton foundation took in well over $200 million until Hillary lost in 2016. Then, for some reason, donations dropped. Odd? Your foundation can own planes, boats, real estate, etc, all of which are "charitable" ... certainly flying donors on the foundations plane to encourage them to donate is legit. 

Many lower level politicians have their foundations ... they can often live in a home owned by the foundation with all the expenses covered. 

Traditionally, Democrats have had zero scrutiny. Jim Wright, Democrat Speaker of the House from '87 to '89 was an exception, as the very politically and media savvy Newt Gingerich took him down over a book deal on the way to the Republicans taking the House majority in '95 for the first time in 50 years. 

Power always corrupts to some degree. The issue is when the corruption is not limited for both sides of the political spectrum. The idea that the rule of law is applied equally to all is highly in question these days. Democrats strongly believe that Blacks are discriminated against on the basis of how many are incarcerated. They naturally assume that it can't be because Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime. We all know that predominantly black areas of our large cities are the safest and lowest crime, right? 

So is it good news that "standard corruption" will now be overlooked for both political parties? To some degree, yes, however a little thought is in order. Perhaps some degree of honor needs to be returned among the political thieves? 

More Than You Need To Know About Sex and Gender

Don't Take Pride In Promoting Pseudoscience 

As we all really know, but in these times, sometimes are afraid to admit, there are two sexes, male and female, and the old joke of: Question, "How do you know the difference between a boy and a girl?" Obvious answer, "You pull down there "jeans"", which has a deeper scientific meaning. You look at their genes, especially their chromosomes, in each of their cells. XX=boy, XY=girl. 

For the practical person, that is it. 

For the impractical, confused, mentally ill, ideologically vs reality based, etc, a new useless term "gender" has been manufactured. Specifically by John Money in 1955. 

Once you get into fiction, it is a bit like the Marvel, Star Trek, or Star Wars "universes". Since they are fictional, time, space, laws of physics, biology, morality, etc are totally arbitrary. One may have some sort of "rules" in a specific imaginary universe, but those are certainly meant to be broken. Consider the semi sacred "Prime Directive" in Star Trek. From time to time it may have created slight dramatic tension, but no actual fealty. 

Unfortunately, when fiction starts to damage reality, esspectially children, it is time for the shrinking set of reality based people to firm up their knowledge of the reality of two sexes and imaginary gender.

Over the last decade, we have observed a striking shift in the politics of LGBT issues. There has been a move away from broadly supported principles based on equality toward the imposition of radical, pseudoscientific ideologies concerning biological sex. A growing genre of articles in high-profile news outlets, magazines, and scientific journals is signaling the end of a binary and immutable perspective on biological sex. The appeal of these pieces lies in the belief that rejecting the binary concept of sex provides society with a liberating opportunity for self-definition, unfettered by material constraints.

One might consider these debates too arcane to have any real significance. However, the pseudoscientific notion that biological sex is mutable and exists on a non-binary continuum serves as a key justification for allowing males who identify as women to compete in female sports and access female prisons, and for administering treatments such as puberty blockers and “gender-affirming” (i.e., body modifying) hormones and surgeries to adolescents and adults alike to fix a perceived misalignment between their sex and “gender identity.” The implications are serious, as these recommendations make women’s sex-based rights unenforceable and directly impact the healthy bodies and minds of children. It is of utmost importance that such actions are grounded in reliable science, not in fashionable political ideologies.

The article is quite easy to read, and thorough in debunking specious claims about "intersex". "hormonal sex", to attack the binary nature of sex. 

Most of what we are burned by today is the confusion of  biological sex, and fictional "gender". 

Now you don't need to be confused, and you have something to explain to those who are so "intelligent" that they just can't accept that much of what they "know" is manifestly wrong. 

The Age Of Reagan: The fall of the old liberal order, Steven Hayward

 https://www.amazon.com/Age-Reagan-Liberal-Order-1964-1980/dp/0307453693

I'm an unabashed Power Line blog, and especially Steven Hayward fan. Steve has written a number of books, this one, "The Age Of Reagan" covers the period from 1964 to 1980. 

Being born in '56, this covers my childhood since I entered Kindergarten in the fall of 1960 at the age of 4 (turning 5 in October). I've been behind my age cohort ever since. 

The book is 717 pages long, but Hayward is an interesting writer. While Reagan is often the focus, the book is really the tale of how LBJ and Jimmy Carter crippled both the country and the Democrat "liberal" order, thus creating the Reagan presidency and significant change in US foreign and domestic policy that consigned the USSR to "the ash heap of history", and ignited a US and world economic boom that lasted until Obama in 2008. Trump was able to create a bit of a "boomlet" from 2017-Covid, and then Biden in a "It's deja vu all over again" trip back to '70s stagflation, sinking stocks, global military peril, and "leadership" you can cry over. 

On page 52, there is discussion about how Johnson used the CIA, FBI, etc to spy on the Goldwater campaign. E Howard Hunt of the CIA would reprise the role in the '72 Nixon campaign. Then, as we see now with the Russia Hoax, Hunter Biden Laptop, etc the use of the "justice" department for political purposes is a very old strategy for the Democrat party, as in Watergate. Republicans have attempted to engage in it as well, but the Deep State is an enemy of Republicans, because no matter how ineffective they are at reigning in the Administrative State, they have tried, which makes them "dangerous to democracy",  which from the POV of Democrats and their allies in the Administrative State, is "dangerous to single party rule" (their version of "democracy") 

Nixon's 2nd term, and the election of Trump to a 2nd term were "existential threats" to the Deep/Administrative State, so all means were of attack were justified. If the ironclad hold of the Deep/Administrative State was loosened a bit, their powers might not be total anymore, and Americans might see some actual truth about what has been happening for a long time. That MUST be prevented!

on page 123, there is a great "adventures in irony" tale. Ernesto Miranda, the defendant in the famous case was stabbed to death in an Arizona bar. The police detained a solid suspect, who stating his "Miranda Rights" refused questioning and was released. The case was never solved. 

Johnson never really cared about Vietnam, and he assiduously avoided calling it a "war", to not offend China or the USSR. You can LOSE a war, but "Peacekeeping" and  Nation Building" are just nice moral actions which may kill 10's of thousands of American troops, and many times that number of "allies" and "enemies", but at least you didn't start a "war" or "lose". Afghanistan is another great example, and our panicked exit was a duplicate of our embarrassment in Vietnam. 

What he cared about was his massive spending to "finish FDR's work"  by a massive Administrative State welfare program called "The Great Society". The government engaged in "The War On Poverty". As with many leftist ideas, it's promises were grand, it's results were disaster. Both the poor and the American taxpayer lost, and continue to lose that war as well. 

On page 293,  a statistic that explains a lot of things is revealed. The total cost of the decade long moon landing project was less than three months of federal social program spending in 1969! Mondale especially hated the "waste" of money in the Apollo program, but loved the "Great Society". 

The sad joke of the Carter presidency is sadly documented. One of the items that presages where we are now was Carter's appointment of Andrew Young to be Ambassador to the UN. Young was on record saying that the destruction of Western civilization was required for the world to emerge as a "free. and brotherly society". He would ramble on about all the racist US leaders. When asked if that would include Abraham Lincoln, he responded "especially Lincoln". 

Page 572 brought back memories of some of the frigid weather of the 1970's. In '75, the NAS made an almost unanimous report that we were headed quickly for an ice age! Anyone that did not believe the science was of course beyond stupid. I was in my 2nd year of college, and given the glacial effects in N Wisconsin, Lake Superior, and the observed tens of thousands of years cycles of ice ages  ... it DID seem quite likely, and frankly still does. Just not in the next few hundred years. 

Being in college and joining IBM during the "Great Malaise" of the Carter years made me a Republican after a youth where everyone I knew was a Democrat because "Republicans were the party of the rich" ... we certainly were not rich, so the choice was obvious. Carter was the last Democrat I voted for ... I was "mugged by reality", and Reagan cemented my choice of becoming reality vs narrative based.  

The combination of the "War on Poverty" and "The War In Vietnam", was essentially a "War on the United States" which many of the left then, and still today thought to be very good idea. On page 193, 

"...what happens when the financial system is backed by a central bank promising redeem deposits in gold? If a crisis of confidence occurs, then you have run on the banks, but a run on the whole countries currency and gold reserves. This is what happened in 1968. The episode brought to an abrupt halt to the lofty promise of "growth liberalism" or "the new economics", and set the stage for rising inflation and economic instability that took 20 years to remedy." 

Carter, Obama and Biden prove that ideologues never learn. When you believe that more government and more spending are the answer to whatever seems to be the problem, that is what you do. Democrat spending is like bloodletting, a standard practice for 3000 years. It was a major tool in the medical box, and if it failed,  doctors were suspicious it was not administered soon enough or extensively enough. Democrats look at spending, especially the deficit brand, the same way. 

I loved both books because they brought back a lot of memories of my life from kindergarten to kids. If you have either and open or moderately conservative mind (or both) and are not afraid of thick books, highly recommended. If you are a confirmed leftist, this is history you want to erase so you can smugly keep on repeating it! 

 

University Of Chicago Freedom Of Speech

University of Chicago Statement on freedom of speech at the university. 

In these days of "cancel culture", censorship of "disinformation", and "safe spaces", the University of Chicago has stood up to defend freedom of speech on their campus. 

35 universities have signed up in support of this statement. As the linked article says, "1,606 to go". One might add the majority of the media social, printed, and otherwise, to follow suit. Is it possible that if enough people read this and thought about it, the accusation of "hate speech" would become a signal that the person or institution making the charge is outside the community of free speech, and needs to be counselled  as to what free speech means in a civil society. 

The statement is short and well worth the read. A few excerpts stating what was once obvious to all Americans, especially those with some level of university education (when a university education was in fact education as opposed to today's indoctrination).

In a word, the University’s fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed. It is for the individual members of the University community, not for the University as an institution, to make those judgments for themselves, and to act on those judgments not by seeking to suppress speech, but by openly and vigorously contesting the ideas that they oppose. Indeed, fostering the ability of members of the University community to engage in such debate and deliberation in an effective and responsible manner is an essential part of the University’s educational mission.

.. President Hanna Holborn Gray observed that “education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them think. Universities should be expected to provide the conditions within which hard thought, and therefore strong disagreement, independent judgment, and the questioning of stubborn assumptions, can flourish in an environment of the greatest freedom.

Much of our social interaction today is all about comfort, and if anyone, any institution, any group, or anything at all gives you a pang of discomfort, that person, institution, media outlet, business, etc needs to be "cancelled", either publicly, or just by you as you shun the person, business, or institution that has "offended" you. 

For Christians, this is especially problematic, since if the message of Christ does NOT offend you regularly as you fail to follow his teachings presented by a pastor with the authority given to a pastor, it is not clear you are an actual practicing Christian. 

Certainly you will be able to find a church with female, gay, trans, etc members and clergy, that believes that "love for all" rather than following Christ in a body of believers and regularly taking part in the sacrament of Holy Communion. In the age of "it's all about me", the concept of "love the sinner, hate the sin" is impossible for many in today's culture to understand. 

"The Rise And Triumph of the Modern Self" does an excellent job of explaining why we got to this point. 

  

Two Cents To Save America, Perry Johnson

 Perry Johnson (politician) - Wikipedia

"Quixotic", as in "exceedingly idealistic, unrealistic, and impractical" are the thoughts that I had as I looked at Mr Johnson's presidential aspirations. 

My not politically involved brother in law, and my equally not politically involved son both a got free hardcover copies of the book. Strange. My wife is co-chair of our county Republican party, and Johnson is running as a Republican

As I looked around a bit to see who this guy is/was, I came across his involvement with ISO 9000 as well as his failed attempt to get the Republican nomination to run against Gretchen Whitmer for governor of Michigan in 2022 because he failed to get the required number of signatures to be on the ballot. 

Failing to get on the ballot is not that impressive. 

As to ISO 9000, my wife and I have had some experience with this in our IBM careers. Basically, ISO requires that you have a documented process for software development, and that you follow it. You pay fairly significant amount of money to have an ISO auditor come into your company and verify that you are doing what you say you are doing. There is no evaluation of your process as to if it makes any sort of rational sense, or actually improves quality, only that you are doing what you say you do. 

"Standards" are an issue that can have a long discussion. "UL" or "Underwriters Laboratories" is one of the best known and widely used. It MAY mean that the product you are buying is "independently tested", however, like ISO, the specifics of that testing vary widely, and there is always the distinct possibility of some form or corruption ... kickbacks, bribes, etc. 

Essentially we are talking about "Non Government Organization" (NGO)  certification, or to put it in my words "NGO equivalent of a countries Administrative State". Are such things needed? Certainly .. the FAA, and the international equivalents certainly help insure aircraft, pilot, navigation and airport safety and ability to interact effectively. (like all international air communication being in English). However, as in the Boeing 737 Max crashes of an internationally certified aircraft, there will be failures. 

We live in a world of trade-offs. How much testing?, how much regulation?, who does the testing?, who "regulates the regulators" to prevent them from creating massive ineffective bureaucracies that end up doing little but lining the pockets of various bureaucratic organizations. It is necessary, but when does it become a necessary evil, and how much "evil" (increased costs, corruption, ineffectiveness, etc) are acceptable? 

Such things are not to be answered in a blog post. 

A lot of the things Johnson's "Two Cents" book suggests ... reducing size of government in general and especially the Administrative State. energy independence, reduced taxes, reduced regulation, secure borders, free trade, "reigniting the American Spirit", incentivizing work and innovation, etc are obvious to all but hardcore Democrats of the Carter, Obama, Biden ilk. 

Reagan tried and was significantly successful and changed the game enough so that the economy, markets, and real income growth, and with the election of a Republican congress for the first time in 50 years combined with a compliant president (Clinton), and the Internet Bubble, even balanced the budget for a couple years! 

The Reagan Recovery, (although far from perfect) lasted until Obama ... a lot of the principles Johnson espouses are essentially Reagan all over again. Trump largely revived a number of those principles with positive results until Covid. Biden has taken us back to at least Jimmy Carter, and I believe has established a new benchmark in dangerous government overreach, unfortunately including further reducing the integrity of elections, weaponizing the government against any opposition, and of course tanking the economy, returning us to "Stagflation", pulling us ever closer to a shooting war with nuclear weapons, and much else. The hope of "Peace Through Wokeness" is believable as "no environment impact energy", or "Military Intelligence". 

In short, Johnson is tilting at the right windmills, so if you need a short refresher on reality relative to government means, it is useful. However like Don Quixote, the effectiveness of someone with a background in international bureaucracy actually practicing what he now preaches is vanishingly small.  

If long shots appeal to you, I would recommend Vivek Ramaswamy. 

DeSantis is my current pick. 

It is a long way to go, but I'll be voting for whoever is the most likely to beat Biden, even if that is a third party candidate with conservative leanings. My guess is that would be Trump, and if he looks to have the best chance of beating Biden because DeSantis is the nominee, but looks to lose in a three party race, I won't have to hold my nose at all for Trump. I believe that 2020 was clearly stolen by a LOT of measures (see "Rigged"), but Trump ought to have let it go after Pence caved. 

The 2016 election and the Trump administration were "rigged" by Hillary, the FBI, and the compliant media, as the Durham Report exposes (way too late). Having a Constitutional/National crisis on how horrible our election system is might of been the best alternative available, but that water is well past the dam.

After 2020 and 2022,  I suspect that it will take bloodshed to prevent us from either "electing", to be run by or like the PRC,  or forced to do so.